axis-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Galbreath, Mark A" <Galbreat...@state.gov>
Subject RE: Project from hell?
Date Fri, 14 May 2004 20:44:46 GMT
"cooler head?"  ok...I'll go fishing in the headwaters of the Chesapeake Bay
over the weekend and see if that helps....

Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Souther [mailto:bsouther@fwdco.com]
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 4:30 PM
To: axis-user@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: Project from hell?


We just wrote a fairly large app using Axis without ever needing to write a 
line of XML.  Take another look at the Axis tutorials on Monday, with a 
cooler head.  

Here is another one that I thought was pretty straight forward:
http://javaboutique.internet.com/tutorials/Axis/index.html



On Friday 14 May 2004 04:23 pm, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Let's try this...if you show up on the IRC channel on monday, i'll
> walk u through it. picky any freenode server
> (http://www.freenode.net/irc_servers.shtml) channel is #apache-axis.
> There are other that hang out there as well who you can ask questions.
>
> -- dims
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, 14 May 2004 16:17:31 -0400, Galbreath, Mark A
>
> <galbreathma@state.gov> wrote:
> > well....sheeeit!  I am trying to find the EASIEST solution - screw
> > writing WSDLs and any other XML files!
> >
> > I tried the Sun tutorial, but it would a fanatic 12 weeks to go through
> > that one.
> >
> > I tried the Axis tutorial and it made no REAL WORLD sense at all.
> >
> > I tried the Oracle JDeveloper and JBuilder Webservices modules and they
> > suck.
> >
> > I DO NOT WANT TO WRITE XML - THIS IS RIDICULOUS!!!
> >
> > What's the solution?  I have pressure all over me to create Web services
> > for every f*cking application in the ..... department.  What gives?  It
> > seems to me that Web services has been way totally overhyped and it
> > delivers nothing of value.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jeff [mailto:jeff@cogentlogic.com]
> > Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 1:48 PM
> > To: axis-user@ws.apache.org; dims@apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Project from hell?
> >
> > #1:
> >
> > You must be joking! There are more than 2000 DIFFERENT elements and
> > complex types. The problems tend to lie within the generated code and
are
> > not obvious until you try to use that code...then you find that it
> > doesn't work. I wasted way too much time trying make changes to the
> > Axis-generated code before giving up. I concluded that Axis was an order
> > of magnitude away from where I needed it to be in terms of complex
> > payloads (though that perception might have been biased by the enormity
> > of the SCS XML Schema). So I use Axis for connectivity (it's great at
> > this, of course) and insert XML documents (that I generate) as
> > document-literal content.
> >
> > Well, okay, I'll check it out over the weekend and file a bug report :-)
> >
> > #2:
> >
> > No. I understand that nowadays some folks use Castor in cases like this.
> > Three years ago my customers needed something like a JAXB that supports
> > the whole of XML Schema and connected to databases. There wasn't
anything
> > then so I wrote XchainJ. This product is now in version 2.3 and runs as
a
> > fully integrated Eclipse Plugin. This isn't a commercial plug though
> > because, oddly enough, I find life is easier if I don't sell it! XchainJ
> > is great for really complex XML but, unfortunately, it has been my
> > experience that people who have a requirement for this are not the sort
> > of people who have the technical expertise to use it! They tend to be
> > scientists not Java programmers. I could ramble on at length about user
> > perceptions, etc. but I won't. When I work face-to-face with customers
> > they really appreciate the product and either use it themselves or pay
me
> > to use it. Typically, I can turn around a project that would take a week
> > using Castor, JAXB, etc. in two or three hours with XchainJ (it does
> > XML/Java/DBMS interoperability). The whole process of dealing with
> > potential customers in other countries and over the Internet is more
> > trouble than it's worth.
> >
> > Interestingly, I presented XchainJ to the technical director of a
company
> > that sells Java software (on the basis that they could do the marketing,
> > etc.). The guy thought the product was great but found he was unable to
> > explain to his marketing folk what it did in terms that they could
> > understand! If they are not experts, people seem to get fogged beyond a
> > certain level of complexity.
> >
> > It's a crazy situation: we have XML Schema that scientists are running
> > with and producing very complex structures BUT they don't have the
> > expertise to implement solutions. Then there's the computer industry
> > that, while populated with developers who can work on complex projects
> > and after great effort can produce solutions, has mainstream tool
vendors
> > that are completely out of touch with anything other than trivial XML!
> > Some commercial products have been written by programmers who were under
> > the impression that there will only ever be one XML Schema document that
> > targets a given namespace. They generate error like "I've encountered
> > this namespace before, what are you giving it to me again for!". Still
> > other won't go beyond a maximum of just one XML Schema document
> > referenced from WSDL. GML comprises 27 XML Schema documents that target
> > the GML namespace (plus others for xlink, etc.) (and GML is a basis
> > schema that users are _intended_ to incorporate as a component of other
> > schemas).
> >
> > An NGO approached me a year ago with a project that they had only a
month
> > to complete. It uses the CSDGM DTD (a.k.a. FGDC). They went to a big
> > software development company before they approached me and were told (i)
> > something that complex couldn't be done and (ii) if it could be done
> > there's no way it could be done within a month. Using XchainJ 1.1, I
> > completed the entire project in one day. Had I had XchainJ 2.3 then, it
> > would have taken half a day.
> >
> > In a similar vein, my customers currently need XML Schema support in
> > rich-clients. The sort of support that doesn't exist today. They are
> > going to get it in XchainJ 3.x. As I said earlier, there's a disconnect
> > between the complexity supported by the computer software industry and
> > the complexity required by scientists. While the Eclipse folks are
> > working on SWT-designer support, I'm working on 'XML Schema / SWT
> > rich-client with connections to controlled content web services plus
> > authentication, authorization, XML document management, etc.' support in
> > a generic tool. An order of magnitude disparity.
> >
> > Now, if only I was a marketeer instead of  a programmer... :-)
> >
> > Warmest regards,
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > Cogent Logic Corporation
> > Toronto, Canada
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Davanum Srinivas" <davanum@gmail.com>
> > To: <axis-user@ws.apache.org>
> > Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 12:18 PM
> > Subject: Re: Project from hell?
> >
> > > A few questions:
> > >
> > > #1: Can you please open a bug report with a pointer to the schema that
> >
> > fails?
> >
> > > #2: Did you try using any JAXB implementation against the schema?
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > > dims
> > >
> > > On Fri, 14 May 2004 12:03:14 -0400, Jeff <jeff@cogentlogic.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi!
> > > >
> > > > On a similar note, there's a disconnect between the capabilities of
> >
> > tools
> >
> > > > created by the software industry and the requirements of the
> > > > scientific community.
> > > >
> > > > I have just completed a particular type of Open GIS Consortium (OGC)
> > > > web service called a Sensor Collection Service. The XML Schema
> > > > referenced
> >
> > from
> >
> > > > the WSDL file comprises 54 XML Schema documents spanning 15
> > > > namespaces.
> >
> > Not
> >
> > > > only did the Axis bean code baulk at this but, when I had completed
> > > > the project, clients found that the .NET tools couldn't handle
> > > > anything like
> >
> > the
> >
> > > > complexity of the SCS XML Schema. Consequently, I supplied 'client
> > > > software'.
> > > >
> > > > The originators of SOAP are conning the software world and no one
> > > > seems
> >
> > to
> >
> > > > mind!
> > > >
> > > > If it's legitimate to distribute platform-independent data (XML) it
> > > > must
> >
> > be
> >
> > > > legitimate to distribute the program logic that uses that data. If
> > > > only
> >
> > we
> >
> > > > had a platform-independent way to deliver program logic!
> > > >
> > > > Forcing web service clients, as a matter of fiat, to write their own
> >
> > program
> >
> > > > logic is the antithesis of OOP: interfaces, inheritance,
polymorphism
> >
> > all
> >
> > > > exits to promote reuse. Reuse is the Holy Grail of software
> > > > development.
> > > >
> > > > It could be argued that each client has their own needs and so it's
> > > > not possible to write generic client-side code. Such an argument is
> > > > false.
> >
> > The
> >
> > > > fact that XML Schemas are used to formalise the data transmitted
> > > > within
> >
> > SOAP
> >
> > > > envelopes means that each web service is necessarily
> >
> > application-specific
> >
> > > > and, as such, is tractable to low-level client code. Such code
> > > > exposes
> >
> > data
> >
> > > > (in the form of XML, if appropriate) that can then be used in
> > > > whatever
> >
> > way
> >
> > > > the ultimate consumer-code requires.
> > > >
> > > > I recently wrote a web service for the Government of Canada that
> >
> > provided
> >
> > > > document-literal content in the form of Web Ontology Language (OWL).
> > > > Everyone was pleased with the outcome and loved the OWL
> > > > implementation
> >
> > BUT
> >
> > > > the first thing they did was to nominate someone to write a generic
> >
> > client
> >
> > > > that dealt with the XML and provided the desired content through a
> > > > Java component that everyone could use/reuse. Hey, that's an
idea...I
> > > > wonder
> >
> > if
> >
> > > > we could supply Java client-side code with our web services. That
> > > > way,
> >
> > the
> >
> > > > .NET folks and all other non-Java folks could continue to do what
> > > > they
> >
> > do
> >
> > > > and the sane software developers can get back to the preferred
> > > > paradigm
> >
> > of
> >
> > > > using portable code.
> > > >
> > > > XML and Java go together. Sun and all other interested parties seem
> > > > to
> >
> > be
> >
> > > > blind to the fact that making portable client-side code an
integrated
> >
> > web
> >
> > > > service deliverable would make those services far more viable. Not
> >
> > everyone
> >
> > > > wants to get into WSDL, etc. when they could simply use a bean! SOAP
> > > > and
> >
> > web
> >
> > > > services are infrastructure. Folks who use my web services want
> > > > turnkey solutions. For them it's about access to scientific data.
> > > > They want to operate at a higher level of abstraction than SOAP!
> > > >
> > > > Warmest regards,
> > > >
> > > > Jeff
> > > >
> > > > Cogent Logic Corporation
> > > >
> > > > Toronto, Canada
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Galbreath, Mark A" <GalbreathMA@state.gov>
> > > > To: <axis-user@ws.apache.org>
> > > > Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 11:22 AM
> > > > Subject: RE: Project from hell?
> > > >
> > > > > EXACTOMUDO!  :-(
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Sherman, Dennis (END-CHI)
> > > > > [mailto:dennis.sherman@endinfosys.com] Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004
> > > > > 9:12 AM
> > > > >
> > > > > Your task sounds to me suspiciously like someone at an executive
> > > > > level having heard about web services, and thinking they've found
> > > > > the silver bullet to all their problems.


Mime
View raw message